Search
Title
Heirs of Burgos v. Court of Appeals
Case Ponente Decision Date
G.R. No. 169711 ABAD, J : 2010-02-08
Case AI Summary AI Digest Ask Jurist AI
Facts
The case involves the attack on the household of Sarah Marie Palma Burgos, resulting in the deaths of
Sarah and her uncle Erasmo Palma. The police believed that the attack was motivated by a land transaction
dispute between Sarah's live-in partner, David So, and the respondent, Johnny Co. Four months after the
incident, the police arrested Cresencio Aman and Romeo Martin, who confessed to their involvement in the
attack and implicated two others, Artemio "Pong" Bergonia and Danilo Say, as well as respondent Co as the
mastermind. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) acquitted Aman and Martin after trial. Ten years later,
respondent Co surrendered to the National Bureau of Investigation and was charged with two counts of
murder and two counts of frustrated murder. Co filed a petition for admission to bail, which the RTC granted
on the ground that the evidence of guilt was not strong. The heirs of Sarah moved for reconsideration, but
the RTC denied it. They then filed a special civil action of certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA), which
dismissed the petition for not involving the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG). The heirs of Sarah
appealed to the Supreme Court.
Issue
The main issue in this case is whether the CA correctly dismissed the special civil action of certiorari for not
involving the OSG.
Ruling
The Supreme Court ruled that the CA correctly dismissed the special civil action of certiorari for not
involving the OSG.
Ratio
The OSG has the sole right and authority to represent the government in legal proceedings. Actions
involving the interest of the state, if not initiated by the OSG, are summarily dismissed. In this case, the
grant of bail to the accused is an aspect of the criminal action and does not impact the civil liability of the
accused. The civil liability can be determined based on preponderance of evidence even if the criminal
action is dismissed. Therefore, the Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the CA's decision.
Summary
The case involves the legal standing of the offended parties in a criminal case to seek reversal of the trial
court's order granting bail to the accused without the intervention of the Solicitor General. The heirs of
Sarah, who were the offended parties, filed a special civil action of certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA)
after the Regional Trial Court (RTC) granted bail to the accused. However, the CA dismissed the petition for
:
not involving the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG). The heirs of Sarah appealed to the Supreme Court,
arguing that the CA erred in dismissing their petition. The Supreme Court ruled that the CA correctly
dismissed the petition, as the OSG has the sole right and authority to represent the government in legal
proceedings. The grant of bail to the accused is an aspect of the criminal action and does not impact the
civil liability of the accused. The civil liability can be determined based on preponderance of evidence even
if the criminal action is dismissed. Therefore, the Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the CA's
decision.
Privacy Policy Terms of Service
© 2023 Jurist AI. All rights reserved.
:
